We come this evening to the fifth
in a series of studies on one of the most delicate and yet
most vital aspects of practical Christian experience, namely,
the doctrine commonly called in the history of Christian thought
and discussion, Christian liberty or liberty of conscience with
respect to the Christian and his relationship to God and the
world of things. In the first three of these studies,
I attempted to accomplish several very vital things with reference
to this broad subject. First of all, I attempted to
give something of the background out of which this issue was forced
upon the thinking and practice of the Church. We looked at the
apostolic history as recorded in the Scriptures and something
of Reformation history. both of which clearly indicate
that the doctrine of Christian liberty or liberty of conscience
was not an academic issue. It was an issue forced upon the
thinking and upon the practice of the people of God because
of some very vital issues that were raised in the history of
the Church. And then secondly, I attempted
to give a broad biblical and theological overview of this
doctrine using the four paragraphs of the Westminster Confession
as a guideline, a framework within which to consider the broad biblical
and theological perspectives. And then thirdly, I attempted
to give a more definitive description of what I call the four pillars
upon which our Christian liberty rests. the matter of the sonship
of believers, the servitude of believers, the sovereignty of
God over the conscience, and finally, the supremacy and sufficiency
of the Scriptures. And having demonstrated that
these four realities constitute the pillars of our liberty in
Christ, we then brought into sharp focus the main implication
of this great truth, namely, that the conscience of a believer
is bound by no other authority than that of the Word of God,
particularly in areas of doctrine, of worship, and of practice. The Christian owns Christ as
his Lord. As we have sung tonight, we would
not remove one bar from the yoke of Christ. But he who most intelligently
acknowledges the supremacy of Christ's Lordship over his conscience
will most vehemently reject the intrusion of any other authority
into the sphere of that Lordship. Perhaps the best way to summarize
all that we tried to assert in that study is to quote from John
Brown, who in his classic treatment of this subject In 1 Peter, he
has almost 70 pages on the verse, in Peter, as free, yet not using
your freedom as a cloak of maliciousness. I quote now John Brown, a Christian
acting worthy of the liberty wherewith Christ has made him
free, believes no doctrine, but what he is persuaded Christ has
taught, observes no ordinance, but what he believes Christ has
appointed, performs nothing as duty. but what he is convinced
Christ has commanded. He gratefully acknowledges as
helpers of his faith all who will assist him in obtaining
wider, clearer, and more impressive views of the mind and will of
the Supreme Teacher and Sovereign. Such he counts his greatest benefactors,
but lords of his faith he will not recognize even in the wisest
and the best of men." So this is not an independence
that acts as though the Son of Truth rises and sets upon our
head and our head alone. No, no. Anyone who can help the
enlightened believer discover the mind of his Lord is his friend. Be it Luther, be it Calvin, be
it Wesley, be it even Charles Finney, who in some areas had
some perception. Many areas we'd say he had little,
but there are areas where he had some. But we will call no
man master and Lord of our conscience. And we do not believe things
because Luther said them or because Calvin said them. We believe
them because we're convinced Christ and his inspired apostles
and prophets have taught them. And we believe them on that account
and on that account alone. And that's the great implication.
of these four pillars of our liberty in Jesus Christ. Well, having laid that theological
basis, that biblical overview of the subject rooted in history,
I began last week in attempting to lay before you what we are
calling the practical guidelines which relate to the exercise
of our liberty. And when we come to this area,
we must constantly keep before us that major principle of distinction
which I sought to articulate last week, and I shall summarize
the teaching of some 15 or 20 minutes in about 32 seconds by
reading again from John Brown, Christian liberty is an internal
thing. It belongs to the mind and conscience
and has direct reference to God. The use of Christian liberty
is an external thing. It belongs to conduct and has
reference to man. No consideration should prevail
on us for a moment to give up our liberty, but many a consideration
should induce us to forego the practical assertion or display
of our liberty. And in rereading the very perceptive
section on the subject of Christian liberty in Calvin's Institutes
this week, I was reminded of how often, apparently, the people
of God have failed to make this distinction. For Calvin said,
and I'm paraphrasing, he said, there are some fellows who feel
the only way they can prove to themselves and others that they
understand their liberty is to exercise it to the full in every
circumstance. And he went on to say that this
is a violation of clear principles of the word of God, and so having
come, I trust, to a new, for some of you perhaps, an initial
appreciation of the extent of your liberty in Christ, you must
at the same time come to an understanding of those guidelines which govern
the exercise of that liberty. And last week I suggested three
of those guidelines. I shall only mention them, and
then our attention will be directed to the fourth in our study tonight.
The first guideline is what I call the prior claims of personal
holiness. Things innocent in themselves
but which impede our Christian progress are to be rejected. We are to abstain voluntarily
from any practice, any association, which impedes our progress in
holiness. No matter how innocent the thing
may be in itself, one of God's gifts given to us freely to enjoy,
if the price for its enjoyment is unnecessary temptation, unnecessary
stumbling and occasions of sin, then these things come into the
realm of what is described in Hebrews 12, 1, as those weights
which must be laid aside along with the sin that doth so easily
beset us if we are to run with patience the race that is set
before us. Then the second principle is what I called the powerful
claims of the advance of the gospel. And 1 Corinthians chapter
9 is an extended commentary upon this principle, where Paul asserts
his rights. I have a right to have a wife.
I have a right to live in the gospel. I have a right to eat
all kinds of foods and drink all kinds of beverages and enter
into all kinds of associations with Jews and Gentiles legitimate
in themselves. But he says, I do not use these
rights to the end that the gospel may be advanced. And so our liberty
is never to be exercised at the expense of the progress of the
gospel. Our liberty in its exercise,
not in its essence. And keep those two separate.
The apostle says, I have these rights, and he would allow no
one to rob him of asserting his rights as a son of God, as a
servant of Christ, bound only to the lordship of God over his
conscience, expressed in his revealed will. But he says, I
will not use these rights to the end that the gospel may be
furthered, and then, finally, The third practical guideline
is what I have called the practical demands of edification. Galatians
5.13, We are not to use our liberty as an occasion to serve the flesh,
but by love to be servants one of another. We are to do all
things unto edification. Let every man seek not his own
good, but his brother's good, even his building up. So much
for the broad review, covering in about six or seven minutes
four hours of study together. Now we come to the fourth practical
guideline relating to the exercise of our liberty in Christ, and
it will take us at least two sessions to cover this in any
degree of comprehensiveness. It's what I'm calling the claims
of the weaker brother. Add to the prior claims of personal
holiness the powerful claims of the advance of the gospel,
the practical demands of edification, guideline number four, the claims,
and if we are to put any words in front of it, it would be the
self-denying claims of the weaker brother. Or we might call them
the flesh-withering claims of the weaker brother. And as we
attempt to think our way through this subject, we shall do so
by considering, first of all, the identity of the weaker brother.
Who is this character? Who is he? How can I know when
I see him, whether looking in the mirror or looking across
the pew? How can I know when I'm in the
presence of a weaker brother? Secondly, the responsibilities
towards the weaker brother. And then thirdly, the responsibilities
of the weaker brother. And I believe under those three
headings we'll be able to touch on every major line of thought
in Paul's treatment of this subject in Romans 14, Romans 15, 1 Corinthians
8, and 1 Corinthians 10. And I'm going to stick very closely
to my notes tonight because we are in an area that is delicate,
that demands unusual precision in expression and therefore in
comprehension. And I don't trust myself to the
heat of the moment. And I have fuller notes than
I normally take. And I'm sticking to them in the
interest of edification. It's not that I'm afraid of your
faces. It's not that I would not delight to just take off
and have what I'd call a preaching. What do you call it when the
violinist can take off on his own? I forgot the word now. He
has a period in the section in the piece where he can just take
off. and to do his own thing. Well, those are wonderful things
in preaching. I think you call it a cadenza, don't you? Isn't
that the proper terminology for it? Yes, some are shaking their
heads, so I must have the right musical terminology. Well, those
are great delights in preaching as well, but I will not indulge
myself that liberty this evening because, seriously, this is a
profoundly delicate and vital issue, and we must ask God for
the help of His Spirit in seeking to understand what He has revealed.
Let us pray together to that end. O Lord, we are conscious as we
come to this subject tonight that many have erred on the left
hand and on the right by a failure to take the whole counsel of
God on this issue. And, O Lord, we ask that your
servant may be unusually helped in presenting an accurate and
balanced statement of this issue, and that your people may be helped
in understanding and in receiving that which is revealed. Help
us, then, Lord, as together we cry to you in our need. In Jesus'
name, amen. First of all, then, the identity
of the weaker brother. And I think we can best identify
him by asking three questions and then looking to the Scriptures
for the answers. First of all, why is he called
the weaker brother? Secondly, where will you find
the weaker brother? And thirdly, what is the fundamental
problem of the weaker brother? All right, question number one,
why is he called the weaker brother? Because certainly the language
of scripture warrants the use of such a term. Turn please to
Romans chapter 14, where we find these words at the beginning
of the chapter, but him that is weak in faith receive you,
yet not for decision of scruples." Verse 2, "...one man hath faith
to eat all things, but he that is weak eateth herbs." And I
understand now it's more and more proper to pronounce the
H and to say herbs. It still sounds funny on my antiquarian
ear, so I will continue to say herbs with a silent H. And now
chapter fifteen and verse one, we that are strong ought to bear
the infirmities of the weak and not to please ourselves. First Corinthians eight and verse
nine, but take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become
a stumbling block to the weak. And so when we use the term,
the weaker brother, we are not imposing a term of derision upon
a brother, we are simply extracting this concept from the scriptures. Now, why is he called the weaker
brother? Well, the answer of these passages
is threefold. Because he is weak in faith,
Secondly, he is weak in understanding or knowledge, and he is weak
in conscience. First of all, then, he is weak
in his faith. Romans 14, and verses 1 and 2. But him that is weak in faith,
that is, weak in the realm of faith, or with reference to his
faith, receive ye, verse 2, but he that is weak, that is, weak
in the realm of faith, eateth Now, in what sense is the weaker
brother described as weak in faith? Well, the thought seems
to be this. God has declared in his word,
such as we find in Romans 14, 14, that nothing is unclean of
itself. That is, with reference to anything
that is not condemned by the law of God, the Apostle Paul
says in language that cannot be misunderstood, I know and
am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean of itself. And in the context, of course,
that has reference particularly to the eating of certain meats. In this context, Romans 14, the
weak man manifests his weakness in the area of being unable to
eat flesh. He is a vegetarian. He that is
weak eateth herbs. He is a vegetarian. And he's
called weak. Mind you, that's not a sign of
strength. It's a sign of weakness, according
to the word of God. Because he eats herbs and abstains
from meat as a matter not of preference for dietary reasons. That's his liberty. But because
of conscience, he cannot look upon meat as a gift from God
to be received with thanksgiving and sanctified by the word of
God in prayer as we find in 1 Timothy chapter 4. Now then, Paul says
the reason he has this problem is He doesn't have strength of
faith to grasp that concept that all of the gifts of God are good,
and they are to be received with thanksgiving. His faith cannot
rise to a joyous grasp upon that concept. Therefore, he's a weaker
brother in the area of his faith. possibly because of past associations
in his unregenerate days, or because of poor teaching since
he has become a believer, one thing he cannot do, he cannot
believe that all things are clean in themselves and live accordingly.
He can't bring himself to do it without condemning his conscience.
He is weak in faith. All right? Secondly, he is called
the weaker brother not only because he is weak in faith, but because
he is weak in his understanding or his knowledge. Turn, please,
to 1 Corinthians 8. Now the subject before us, though
it is the same general field of concern, the specific application
is different. In Romans 14, it is vegetarian
as opposed to a full diet of meat and vegetables. 1 Corinthians
8, the specific subject is, things sacrificed to idols. In other
words, food that was given up to a sacrifice as a sacrifice
in a heathen temple, then after the worshipper went home and
there was more meat than the heathen priest could eat, some
of this was sold in a bargain meat counter outside the heathen
temple. And Christians, trying to be
frugal with their money, tracked down bargains, and many of them
would purchase this meat and eat it. But some people, when
they saw another believer doing this, they just became unhinged. They had such an association
in their minds between that meat that a few hours before had been
offered up upon a heathen altar and the worship of a heathen
deity that they thought to eat that meat was to partake of the
heathen worship out of which the Lord had delivered them.
Now the issue at hand in this passage is not eating that meat
in the temple part of the heathen worship. Paul deals with that
in chapter 10 and shows the incongruity of this. But here, it's eating
the meat divorced from the act of worship, but the meat that
was at one time a part of that heathen worship. Now, notice
what Paul says. We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge poppeth up, but love
edifyeth. If any man think that he knoweth
anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know. But if any
man loveth God, the same is known by him. Concerning, therefore,
the eating of things sacrificed to idols. That's the issue at
hand. Now, notice what he says. We
know, we who have enlightened consciences know that no idol
is anything in the world and that there is no God but one.
In other words, an idol is a non-entity. You may give a name to something
that you set up in a heathen temple. You can call that God
Zeus, you can call it Jupiter, you can call it Mungibungo, you
can give it any name you want. But Paul says, giving it a name
and giving it some substance in the way of an idol doesn't
make it become something. You don't go out and create gods
at your whim. He says, we know and are persuaded there is but
one true and living God. Verse 5, for though there Though
there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth,
as there are gods many and lords many, yet to us there is one
God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him,
and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through
him." In other words, Paul says, we're absolutely convinced that
when a piece of meat has gone from the living state on the
back of the steer, to the dead stayed on a heathen temple, out
to the cut-up condition in the shambles in the meat market,
nothing material has happened to that meat as a gift from God.
Because it's only been offered to something that doesn't exist
in the first place. So if it's been offered to something that
doesn't exist, it doesn't affect what's been offered. That's his
reason. He says, now we know this. We're persuaded of it.
Our knowledge of God and the world of spiritual reality is
such that we're absolutely convinced of this. But, he says, verse
7, how be it? There is not in all men that
knowledge, but some, being used or accustomed until now to the
idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol, and their conscience,
being weak, is defiled." You see what he's saying? He's saying
some do not have this knowledge. They are weak in their knowledge.
They do not know that that meat has no more association with
a substantial reality than it does with another planet. There
is no such thing as another God. Therefore, when it's been offered
to another God, nothing has happened to it, but he said this poor
man in his conscience doesn't realize that. And because in
the past that meat was associated with the idol, which in his mind
had substantial reality, and now he's been brought to worship
the only true and living God, he just cannot go near such meat,
because he cannot disassociate meat from idol. So his problem
is, according to verse 7, a weakness of knowledge. He is not thinking
according to reality, and therefore he is a weaker brother. And then
thirdly, he is weak in his conscience. 1 Corinthians 8 and verse 12. Assuming now, Paul says that
a man who has this knowledge goes again and buys his piece
of bargain meat. And on his way home, he stops
by his brother who's weak in knowledge and says, Hey, Henry,
look what I got for 22 cents a pound. We're going to eat high
on the hog tonight. And he brags about it. And this
poor fellow is pained with that. He says, Well, look, he's been
a Christian for three years and he can do it. Boy, maybe I ought
to go ahead and get a bargain. So against his own conscience,
simply following the example of his brother, He buys that
meat and eats it while his conscience is screaming at him all the while.
Verse 12, And thus sinning against the brethren and wounding their
conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore,
if meat causes my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh
forevermore that I cause not my brother to stumble. Now, the
only point we want to make right now is The point based upon the
phrase, wounding their conscience when it is weak. Now, it does
not mean the conscience of the weaker brother is inactive. No,
no. In the weaker brother, the conscience is hyperactive. Conscience
is screaming and hollering about things that it ought to be silent
about. You see, the conscience of the weaker brother is not
slumbering. When it says it's weak, it doesn't mean it's volume
or it's activity is weak. It means that the standard to
which it looks being inaccurate, the conscience is not functioning
in the strength of enlightened maturity. The conscience is not
functioning in the strength of enlightened maturity. Now then, he's called weaker
brother then because he's weak in faith, weak in understanding,
weak in conscience. Now I want to state two things
by way of qualification. Before we move on to consider,
where is he found? This does not infer that the
weaker brother is a second-class citizen. You will notice in Romans
14, Paul is very, very careful to guard against casting any
aspersions upon the reality of this weaker brother's relationship
to Christ or upon the depth of his practical devotion to Christ.
The reality of his relationship to Christ is asserted again and
again when Paul affords or accords to him the lovely name, Brother. Romans 14 and verse 10, But thou,
why dost thou judge thy brother? Or thou again, why dost thou
set it not, or despise? That's the peculiar temptation
of the strong to the weak. Why dost thou despise thy brother? Who is this weaker brother? He
is a weaker brother. He has full status in the family
of God. The reality of his relationship
to Christ is unquestionable and ought to be unquestioned by the
people of God. Verse 13, Let us not therefore
judge one another any more, but judge ye this rather that no
man put a stumbling block in his brother's way." Verse 15,
"...for if because of meat thy brother is grieved." And then
1 Corinthians 8, he's again called with this term of filial endearment. He's a brother in the Lord. Now
it's important that we never say weaker brother. He is weaker
brother. Any difference? Now be careful. The Apostle Paul never cast dispersions
upon the reality of his relationship to Christ on the one hand or
upon the depth of his practical piety on the other. And he underscores
this in verses 5 through 8 of Romans 14. One man esteemeth
one day above another. Here's another area of concern,
the keeping of special feast days, or fast days, within the
ceremonial framework. Another esteemeth every day alike.
Let each man be fully assured in his own mind. He that regards
the day, here's the weaker brother, who's still keeping certain days
that have their rootage in the old ceremonial system. What does
he say about it? He says he regards it unto the
Lord. In other words, his scruples
about keeping certain days are deeply religious and genuinely
pious. Paul says this devotion to Christ
is genuine. Even when he's carrying out the
scruples of his weak conscience, he's doing it as unto the Lord. Furthermore, he says, And he
that eateth, eateth to the Lord, For he giveth God thanks, he
that eateth not, unto the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God
thanks. None of us, weak or strong, lives
to himself. None dies to himself. Whether
we live, weak or strong, we live to the Lord. Whether we die,
we die to the Lord. Weak or strong, whether we live,
therefore die, we are the Lord. You see what he does? He says,
in the area of being the purchased possession of Christ, in the
outworking of that realization, being a present burning longing
to please Him, the weak brother is not one step behind the strong
brother. And it's essential for us to
grasp that principle. All right, then. On the one hand,
this qualification, he is no second-class citizen, and on
the other, The strong brother in this context is not strong
in any other sense than that which fits the context. He's
strong in his faith in the area that he can believe that all
of God's gifts are good and receive them with thanksgiving. He's
strong in his knowledge in that he realizes an idol is nothing.
He is strong in his conscience in the aspect that his conscience
is not condemning him about things for which he should not feel
condemned. It does not mean he's strong in all the other graces
of the Christian life. It does not mean he has extra
strength so that he can flirt with temptation in a way that
would be wrong for the weaker brother. And many a person has
ruined himself by saying, oh, I'm the strong person according
to this passage, my conscience doesn't trouble about things
it ought not, and therefore that person has become cocky, and
assuming that he stood in every other area because he was strong
in this area, it wasn't long before pride went before his
fall. It's in a Christian liberty context
that Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10, 12, wherefore let him that
thinketh he standeth take heed, lest he fall. And I feel those
two qualifications need desperately to be made as we identify the
weaker brother. Do you see who he is now? Do
you see him in the mirror? Some of you see him in the mirror.
You see her in the mirror every day. Some of you see her by your
side or him by your side. I see some of you sitting out
there in that assembly. Now, the second question we have
to ask in identifying the weaker brother is where is he found?
Well, the whole drift of Romans 14 and 15 and 1 Corinthians 8
and 10 indicates that he is found side by side in the same assembly
with the strong believer. In other words, all of these
exhortations to the weak and to the strong and their mutual
responsibilities are given to us on the assumption that the
weak and the strong are deeply and pervasively integrated into
common life in common assemblies of God. The strong did not cast
off the weak as unworthy of their fellowship. And the weak did
not split themselves off and draw up their own covenant of
membership, requiring that nobody could become part of their church
unless they followed the dictates of their weak conscience. And
that is one of the curses of the evangelical church today.
Whole churches are a society of the weak! And the strong could
not get in those churches if they tried. because they couldn't
sign their covenant of conduct that condemned things indifferent. And in reaction against that,
there are churches where the weak are received as something
less than genuine lovers of Christ and of His truth. And there is
a de facto, that is, in reality, though not stated as such, There
is a de facto schism in churches predominated by the strong, and
there is almost an accommodating, hyper-spiritual, superior attitude
from the strong towards the weak. The Apostle Paul would tolerate
neither of these attitudes. The weak brother was found integrated
into the life of assemblies, which, according to these passages,
seem to be dominated by those whom he would call the strong. And they are found dwelling together
in mutual love, acceptance, and submission, one to another, as
we shall see in the unfolding exposition. So then, if we're
a biblical church, if the church you belong to is a biblical church,
you can expect to find the weak and the strong gathering together
in one common life under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. And
you see, that's no easy thing to keep that. In the 13 years
that I've been an under-shepherd in this flock, I felt all kinds
of pressures from the left and the right that would either push
the weak out or push the strong out. And we have stood with a
rock-like adamancy by the grace of God, refusing to do either.
I've had people question me about certain clothing styles. Do you
permit women to come to church with pantsuits? I said, what
do you mean, do I permit them? Where did God make me a pope
on women's clothing? The consciences of our women
are bound by the biblical norms, which are these. She is to dress
modestly as becometh a woman professing godliness. And if
she can do that with a pantsuit, fine. Christ is Lord of her conscience,
not the elders. Well, what kind of membership
covenant do you have to keep out worldliness? Well, if I thought
a membership covenant would keep out worldliness, I'd have one
4,300 pages long, my friend. Yes, worldliness is an attitude
of heart. If the grace of God is not operating
in your heart, applying the absolute standard of the law of God to
your heart, no amount of evangelical checklists will secure holiness. It will only promote Phariseeism.
You'll end up cleansing the outside of the cup and the platter, while
inwardly is all kinds of uncleanness. If you feel uncomfortable in
that setting, my friend, it ain't going to change around here by
the grace of God, so you just better go look elsewhere. If
you're hoping that somehow you'll get us to bend, no, sir. These are precious, dearly, dearly
bought concepts of the word of God. And may God ever grant that
in this place, the strong and the weak will be found integrated
at a deep and pervasive level in our life before God and with
one another. That's where they were found
in the apostolic church, in the same assemblies. All right. The
third question we've got to ask is we try to identify the weaker
brother. In what sense is he weak? Weak in faith, weak in
knowledge, weak in conscience. Where is he? Right among the
strong. Third question, what is his fundamental
problem? In this matter of living together
with the strong and vice versa, what is the fundamental problem?
Well, the fundamental problem is this. While dwelling together
with the strong, who may exercise their liberty with a good conscience
in the presence of the weak, the weak man is tempted blindly
to follow the example of the strong and thereby violate his
own conscience. Now let's look at the scriptures
to see that this is so. Romans 14, verses 14 and 15.
Romans 14, verses 14 and 15. Or let's back up to 13. Let us not therefore judge one
another anymore. That is, let the weak acknowledge
that the strong walks in his integrity before God. Let the
strong acknowledge that the weak walks in his integrity before
God. Don't anybody play the role of God in this. To his own master
he stands or falls. But judge ye this rather. If
you're going to be concerned about something, let this be
your concern. That no man put a stumbling block in his brother's
way or an occasion of falling. Now he's going to explain what
that means. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing
is unclean of itself, save that to him who accounteth anything
to be unclean, to him it is unclean. For if because of meat thy brother
is grieved, and grieved does not mean he can't understand
how you can eat that meat and be a good Christian. The grief
here is the grief of a conscience condemned by indulging in that
which the man believes to be sin. If because of thy meat thy
brother is grieved, thou walkest no longer in love. Destroy not
with thy meat him for whom Christ died." Now, parallel this with
1 Corinthians 8, 7 and 10, and you'll see the same train of
thought. Howbeit there is not in all men
that knowledge. That is, the knowledge that an
idol is nothing but the sum being used until now until the idol,
eat, as of a thing sacrificed to an idol, and their conscience
being weak is defiled. But food will not commend us
to God, neither if we eat not are we the worse, nor if we eat
are we the better. But take heed, lest by any means
this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to the weak.
For if a man see thee who has knowledge, that is the strong
brother, sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience,
if he is weak, be emboldened to eat that which is sacrificed
to idols? For through thy knowledge, he
that is weak perishes, the brother for whose sake Christ died. And
thus sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience
when it is weak, ye sin against Christ. Now you get the main
thrust. There are a lot of things in those verses you would love
to have expounded. I know that. I know that. I am very much aware
of some of the thoughts that no doubt are going through your
minds. But I trust you will see what the fundamental problem
is. Here is the strong brother whose conscience is not hung
up on extra biblical standards. It's bound by the word and it's
enlightened by the word. Mead is mead, a gift from God,
whether it's ever laying on an altar, a heathen temple altar
or not. He's the strong brother. Now,
of course, the weaker brother, who oft times will be the one
more immature in the faith, not always, but many times, he's
a newcomer to the faith, he still has a lot of the baggage from
his old life and thought patterns and scruples from his old life,
he sees this strong brother exercising his God-given liberty. And his
problem is that rather than following the dictates of his conscience
as far as his conscience is presently enlightened, He yields the integrity
of his conscience to follow the example of his brother's conscience. And when he does, instead of
being able, like his brother, who having given thanks for that
meal, can go away with a happy heart, looking back upon what
he's enjoyed, this man follows in the example of the stronger
brother. And lo and behold, when he's
done, his conscience is smiting him. I've sinned. I've gone back
to my old ways. I've partaken of heathen worship.
Woe is me. And he feels the pain and the
grief of an accusing conscience. Now his problem, you see, is
that he's following the example of the strong before his conscience
has caught up with the light that the strong man has in that
given area. In the New Testament, it had
reference to meat offered to idols, it had reference to the
subject of vegetarian or meat-eating, it had reference to the keeping
of specific days. These three things are explicitly
dealt with in the passages before us. Current examples would be
such things as selective theater attendance, the moderate use
of alcoholic beverages, certain types of clothing, certain types
of music, certain types of entertainment, certain places of recreation. These are the current issues
that fall within the same orbit touched on with the meat offered
to idols, meat as opposed to vegetable diet, the keeping of
specific days. And as then, so now. The weak
will be tempted to look upon his brethren who obviously are
patterns of godliness and piety and spiritual strength to him
and say, well, if they can do that with a good conscience before
God, I will blindly follow their example. And when they do, they
do that which the scripture says to them is sin. Their conscience
is defiled. They are grieved in their spirits
and they are crippled in their Christian walk. So then, the
exercise of the liberty in the presence of the strong, in the
presence of the weak, causes them to stumble. Well, that's
the problem. Now, I hope we've identified
the weaker brother. Now let us consider, or at least
begin to consider, what are the responsibilities towards this
brother. It is clear that the bulk of
the biblical directions are aimed towards the strong and their
responsibilities toward the weak. And I know a few areas of biblical
directive which more accurately lay bare the depth of your self-sacrificing
love than this. Why in the world should the many
bend to the few, especially when it's the strong to the weak?
Well, maybe I ought to ask you mothers. Why should so much of
your time be spent with caring for your infants. Well, just
because they're infants and they need that care. And the years
and the maturity, I hope, have brought you to the place where,
unlike the infant whose whole world begins and ends with himself,
you've begun to learn something of the joy of self-sacrificing
love, which terminates upon others and not upon yourself. And this
may be an acid test to many of you of where you really are spiritually,
as you face the clear directives of the Word of God concerning
the responsibilities we have toward the weaker brethren. All right? Responsibility number
one, we must receive him. Romans 14, verse 1. But him that is weak in faith,
receive ye. yet not for decision of scruples. Him that is weak in faith, receive
ye. That is, we must embrace such
a one in the bonds of unfeigned and unreserved love. The measure
of our acceptance of the weaker brother is that given to us in
Romans 15.7. It is the measure of Christ's
acceptance of us. Wherefore, receive ye one another,
even as Christ also received you to the glory of God. Now, how
did Christ receive you? When you came in your sin, in
your guilt, in your pollution, in your vileness, and by the
effectual call of God through the gospel, how did Christ receive
you? Did He hold you off at arm's
length and just link a finger around you, as it were, and say,
now, when you straighten up here, there, and that, and the other
place, then two fingers? No, no. He received us as the Father
received the prodigal. While He was yet a great way
off, the Father ran to Him, fell upon His neck, and kissed Him.
There was unfettered, unreserved embrace. receive one another as Christ
has received. That's our first responsibility
to the weaker brother. We are to receive him in the
bonds of unfamed and unreserved love. And that will mean, in
a negative way, at least three things. And this is just opening
up some of the perspectives here. We are not to hold him off at
a distance until his conscience is enlightened. For when his
conscience is enlightened, he is no longer weak in faith. Therefore,
the verse would not obtain, you see. But him that is weak in
faith, receive you while he is still weak. Do not hold him off
till the weak become strong, and then say, Now, brother, you
are one of us. Since you can now identify with me with a good
conscience in the exercise of my liberty, now we can really
have fellowship. No, no. He is to be received. With all his scruples hanging
on, on, on and oozing out all over him. Poor pain brother with
wrinkles in his brow. I'm a great one to talk about
wrinkles in the brow. But there he is. He's all tied up in knots. He's got scruples about this
and that. And he's obviously so uncomfortable
with God's world and with himself in it that he can't help but
make you feel uncomfortable around him. But God says, receive him
just as he is. You receive him. With all his scruples and all
his hangups, you receive him. You don't hold him off at a distance
till his conscience is enlightened. Secondly, you don't receive him
only to the end of straightening him out. And that seems to be
the thought of verse one. Yet not for decision of scruples. And Professor Murray acknowledges
in his commentary on Romans that this is a difficult phrase or
clause, but probably what it means is don't receive him to
the end that you may subject his scruples to your scrutiny.
Now, some would say, yeah, I'll receive the brother so I get
him close enough I can get him all sorted out. If your only
reason for receiving him is to instruct him, he'll sense that.
No, you receive him for one reason and one reason only. Christ has
received him. And if Christ has received him
with unfettered and unsane love, who are you to hold him off at
a distance? So to receive him means, negatively, you don't
hold him off at a distance till his conscience is enlightened.
Secondly, you don't receive him only to the end of correcting
him. And thirdly, having received him, you don't despise him or
set him at naught. Verse three, let not him that
eateth, that's the strong brother, set at naught him that eateth
not. And the word set at naught is
the word for despise, to treat with scorn or contempt. It's
the word used in Luke 18. Of the Pharisees, who set themselves
apart as righteous and set all others at naught, that is, despised
all others. You don't receive him and then
regard him as a second-class citizen. Now, that's an awesome
responsibility. No distinction in esteem, affection,
and mutual trust, even in the midst of deep and pervasive differences
on matters of indifference. Now you say, that's impossible.
According to the flesh, yes. And that's why many people are
simply thrown in the towel, and you have whole denominations
that have come to birth over issues related to Christian liberty.
One of the largest cleavages in the Presbyterian Church in
our country, about 35 years ago, basically occurred over this
very issue. Over this very issue. that brethren
would not receive one another until their consciences saw alike
on matters of indifference. What a tragedy. What a tragedy. What a tragedy when the word
of God is so clear. We are to receive the weaker
brother. Now we'll see when we come to the responsibilities
of the weaker brother. He's to receive the strong too. That sword cuts
both ways. But we'll leave him alone tonight.
in terms of his responsibilities for the sake of order and teaching.
The strong are to receive the weak. Secondly, we must not only
receive him, the scripture says we must not destroy him. We must
not destroy him. That is, we must restrict the
exercise of our liberty to the extent that it would become the
occasion of sin to our weaker brother. Romans 14, 13-22. That's the drift of that whole
passage. Let us not therefore judge one
another anymore in a context of mutual acceptance and reception. We are now concerned with the
expression of love, particularly the strong towards the weak.
And the strong who knows that nothing is unclean of itself
will not knowingly and deliberately continue to exercise his liberty
in the presence of his weaker brother if that liberty exercise
will embolden the weaker brother to violate his conscience. That's a summary of that entire
paragraph. Now it's noticeable that Paul
says, now don't, strong brother, give up your liberty. Verse 21,
verse 22, the faith which thou hast, have to thyself before
God. Don't let the weak brother bully
you into his position of conscience. No, no. If you abstain, you abstain
on the principle that I will not by my example cause my weaker
brother to choose a course that would be sin for him. I will
not destroy him for the sake of meat or drink or any other
thing. Verse 21, it is good not to eat
flesh if I must become a vegetarian in the presence of my brother,
nor to drink wine if I must be a teetotaler in the presence
of my brother, nor to do anything whereby my brother stumbles. And stumble, may I remind you,
does not mean he gets upset because I am a strong brother. He comes
up and says, you know, your ties fumbles me. He calls me to stumble. I say,
what do you mean? Well, I don't like green ties and I get mad
when I see them. So you better take your green
tie off. To such a person, I'd get one greener yet. I'd get one greener yet. You
say, my brother, if green ties are sin in your conscience, And
by my wearing one, you go out and buy a bright green tie and
wear it, all the while your conscience is telling you it's sin. Now
I'll take my green tie off and never wear a green tie in your
presence forever. See the difference? I'm not to
bend to some Pharisee's whims. And don't you try to hide behind
that verse if you're the weaker brother in any area and say,
oh, boy, I'm in the driver's seat. I go through in my weak
wagon and make all these strong people bend. No, no, no, no,
no. No, no. Cause to stumble in the context
means one thing. That is, the weaker brother chooses
a course of action that is sin to his own conscience by following
the example of the strong. And so Paul says, don't destroy
him. For when a man starts choosing
a course which in his own conscience is sin, he's in the high road
to destruction. It is sin that brings destruction. And when the conscience is wounded
and defiled, and conscious, delightful communion with God is severed,
and we wallow in that state of guilt and condemnation and unrelieved
pressure of spirit, there is no prosperity in the Christian
life. This is essentially the same
thrust of 1 Corinthians 8, 9 to 13. Having read it previously,
let me just remind you of these principles. Don't destroy your
brother, he says. Verse nine, take heed, lest by
any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to the
weak. For if a man see thee, you see,
here's the exercise of liberty in the presence of the weak.
If he see thee, will not his conscience be emboldened to eat
things sacrificed to idols? For through thy knowledge he
that is weak perishes, the brother for whose sake Christ died. Thus
sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience
when it is weak is sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat causes
my brother to stumble in this context, meat offered to idols,
I will eat no flesh forevermore. That is, in the presence of my
brother, that I cause not my brother to stumble. We must not,
by our example, cause the weaker brother to be destroyed by doing
that which he knows he thinks in himself is sin. And if that
is so by example, certainly any form of coercion is equally wicked. So often someone who has been
a weak brother and had the furrowed brow of scruples about a thousand
things, comes into the glorious liberty of his sonship and says,
nobody can strap my conscience but King Jesus. And he's like,
it's like getting saved all over again. First time he got delivered
from bondage to sin and the devil in the world. And now the second
time he got delivered from bondage to men and manmade standards
and scruples. And his freedom is so blissful
to him in his spirit. He hasn't become a liberty, using
his liberty for a cloak of license. He's begun to enjoy God's world.
And the father smiles when he sees the child smile. How would
you feel if, as a parent, you loaded a room with a hundred
different gifts, every one of them suited for the good of your
child, and your child came in, and after looking them all over,
reached out with trembling hand and only took one of them. And
he said, Son, Daughter, they're all yours. I said, No, I'm afraid
that one will hurt me. How would you feel as a father?
Come on, now, how would you feel? Come on, now, how would you feel?
The scripture says he has given us all things richly to enjoy.
The father's grieved when the child doesn't see his liberty
to receive all of his gifts. And so this poor, trembling person
has just reached out and taken one of the gifts, suddenly finds
himself free in Christ to all God's gifts, and he's enjoying
them. And along comes one of his trembling weak brethren,
you see. And his temptation is to drag him in the room and say,
Brother, all the gifts are there. They're for us. They're for our
good. Enjoy them all! And he tries to coerce. His motive
is love. We must not do that. You see,
you cannot enlighten conscience by imposing an activity and hoping
that the activity will filter back into the conscience. Conscience
must lead into the activity with peace. Many of us know, when
we've tried to do this, We've said, well, if I do the thing,
then maybe I'll feel better afterwards. No, no. If conscience said no
before, he says no afterwards a hundred times louder. Right? Always. Always. And so we must
not destroy our brother. We must forego the exercise of
any legitimate liberty that will induce our brother to sin against
his own conscience. And then thirdly, we must receive
him. We must not destroy him. We must
not alienate him. That is, we must forego the exercise
of liberties which would be so offensive as to alienate the
weak brother's affections and confidence, and thereby cut off
a relationship in which we can help him and instruct him. What
Paul says with reference to the unsaved is true in principle
with reference to the saved. Do you remember what he said
in 1 Corinthians 9? He says, I become all things to all men
that I may by all means save some, gain some. To the Jew I
became as a Jew. I bowed to all of his mosaic
scruples and the dictums of the ceremonial law. Why did I do
this? So that I would not alienate him from me as a person, that
I might obtain such a relationship of friendship and affinity that
I might communicate the gospel to him. Now, what's true with
the unsaved is true with your brethren. There are times when
we must restrain the exercise of our liberty, not because the
weak brother will follow our example and sin, but because
he will be so unhinged. And I'm not just playing that
word. I don't know a better contemporary word. He'll become so unhinged
by the display of your liberty that there'll be a suspicion
as to the integrity of your moral character. And once that suspicion
comes, you no longer have the platform of instructing him.
And I believe this is what Paul is talking about in Romans 14,
19. Look at Romans 14 and verse 19. So then let us follow after the
things which make for peace, that is, concord, amity, oneness
among the people of God, and Things whereby we may edify one
another, and no one can be an instrument of your edification
unless he's at peace with you, and you with him. Right? What
happens in the church when there's animosity and bitterness and
suspicion between a flock of God and the under shepherds?
They can no longer lead them. They can't do it. It's impossible. Instruction and edification can
only exist in the relationship of mutual confidence and love.
So then, if we love that weaker brother, we will not alienate
him by the exercise of liberties which will bring into suspicion
in his eyes, albeit wrong. He's weak. Granted, he's weak.
But we must not alienate him. Now, let me mention a word of
caution. I've hinted at it, but I want to underscore it clearly.
In all of this, we are never, we are never, we are never to
conform our consciences to the conscience of the weak. In every
one of us there's a Pope, and we desire to bind everyone to
the victims of our own conscience. And the weak is no less a Pope
by nature. And if you allow the weak to
do it, you know what they'll do to you? From the concessions
you make in love, they'll want to bring you into bondage to
their scruples. And I am amazed in this grip me in my preparation
this week how Paul so cleverly and I wonder if he didn't have
a smile when he did it and his tongue in his cheek a little
bit. Notice how he emphasizes this principle in Romans 14.
When he's going to deal with this business of the strong not
putting a stumbling block before the weak, how does he go about
it? Well, he states the principle in verse 13. Let us not therefore
judge one another anymore, but judge this rather, that no man
put a stumbling block in his brother's way or an occasion
of falling. But now he says, I know and am persuaded in the
Lord Jesus that nothing is unpainted. He's saying at the outset, now,
look, my weak brother, you are weak. And if you were thinking
up to the apostolic standard, you'd say amen to me when I say
I know and am persuaded that nothing's unclean of itself.
You'd say amen with me. But you haven't come to that
place yet. And I'm going to try to bend to where you are. But
don't you try to bend me to where you are in your conscience because
I'm persuaded how I'm persuaded in the Lord Jesus. with reference
to the Lordship of Christ, with reference to my subjection to
Him, my union to Him in a state of grace. Those things never
change. He's saying, in essence, don't
you try to budge me from this persuasion. It's unbudgeable.
It's fixed. It's reinforced concrete. And
I say to any who, by the grace of God, are strong in this area,
don't allow the weak to be a pope to your conscience. Paul asserts
his knowledge here. He does the same thing in 1 Corinthians
8. When he's going to deal with a thing, how does he start out?
He says, we know that an idol is nothing. And he's saying,
in essence, to the weak, if you thought as you ought to thought,
you'd know an idol is nothing. But you don't know that yet.
So I'll bend you in love in the exercise of my liberty, but I
will not give up the essence of my liberty, which is rooted
in my knowledge. You see the principle? Don't
let anyone rob you of the essence of your liberty. It was purchased
at too dear a price. For freedom did Christ set you
free! Don't rob him of the reward of
his sufferings. Don't relinquish the essence
of your liberty in the presence of the weakest brother while
being willing to restrict the exercise of your liberty to the
farthest degree for the sake of your weaker brother. I think maybe that's enough for
tonight. That's not all I'd hope to get through, but we'll hold
the rest to the next time. Let me just tell you what I propose
to do, God willing, in our session two weeks from tonight. I want
to show from the scriptures what are the implications if the strong
refuse to follow these three self-withering directives with
reference to the weak. If you will not receive him,
if you will not take a course of action calculated not to destroy
him, and not to alienate him. These passages say five things
are true of you, and they're very sobering things. Maybe you
ought to study them, asking the question, if I do not do the
three things in my responsibilities to the weak, what does this say
to me? What does it say about me? And then we'll conclude our
study with a consideration of the responsibility of the weaker
brother to God, to himself, and to his brethren. And it's all
right here. in these passages. Now, everything I've said tonight
has assumed that I'm speaking to a body of God's people, to
whom the concept of submission to Christ is real and precious. But I would be foolish and unrealistic
if I were to give the impression that I thought that every person
in the sound of my voice tonight understood experimentally what
it was to be a bondservant of Christ and a son or daughter
of God. And I want you to know that in directing my remarks
almost exclusively to the people of God, it's not because I'm
indifferent to your state, simply because the demands of covering
the material have precluded any extensive application to the
conscience of the unconverted. But, oh, my friend, I'd hate
you to leave this place thinking that there was no concern in
the heart of the servant of God or the people of God for you
if you're in bondage to your sin, a slave of the devil. My friend, you know nothing of
the glorious liberty of the sons of God, and you will never know
it until you repent and believe the gospel, until you come into
vital union with Jesus Christ, the Son of God, for whom the
Son sets free, is free indeed. I would urge you Much of this
has gone clear over your head, and you say, what in the world
has that man been getting excited about, and those crazy people
nodding, and mm-mm, and like they understood. Oh, my friend,
listen, listen, listen. Their taste buds are tasting
things for which you have no appetite nor taste, and you never
will until you're brought into union with the Savior, who has
brought them into union with Himself. Let me lovingly say
to some of you who've seen yourself in the mirror of the Word, and
you say, Pastor, I believe I'm that weaker brother or sister,
weak in this area. What am I to do? Well, you just
have to hang on for a couple of weeks until I try to inspire
you. But one thing you can do is you
can acknowledge that you are what God says you are. And there's
no disgrace in that. You see? You're not a second-class
citizen. If you were to come up to me
at the door tonight and say, Pastor Martin, I'm one of those weak
brothers or sisters, I hope you'd be able to do so with the confidence
that my love to you in Christ was not one dram less than my
love to the strongest brother or sister in Christ in this area
of conscience. So learn to accept yourself for
where you are so you can go to work on what you are by the grace
of God. There's no shame attached to it. You see, the whole assumption
The whole assumption, and this will come out more strongly in
the subsequent study, but I should mention that the whole assumption
is that there is communication between the weak and strong,
as well as interaction of life. And how do I know if you're caused
to go against your conscience by my example unless you tell
me? How do I know? I'm no mind reader. Sometimes
the Lord gives an arrow from his quiver that may make you
wonder if maybe the preacher's a mind reader. An application
goes so close to the conscience and close so specific to your
circumstance, but the preacher is no mind reader. The people
of God are not mind readers. And in the context, you see,
of acceptance, we can dare to be open with one another. You
see? Just as in a wholesome marriage, where there is real acceptance,
husband to wife, wife to husband, you can be open and transparent
about your disappointments with one another, about the things
that you'd like to see changed. Well, can we not be this way
in our relationship to one another? It'd be a tragic thing for a
strong brother to be destroying a weak brother and to be ignorant
of it. Who if only, if he only knew the area where his example
is being an occasion of stumbling, he would gladly say with Paul,
I will eat no meat, drink no wine, do nothing, whereby my
brother is caused to stumble. But he cannot voluntarily relinquish
the exercise of his liberty unless he has knowledge of the influence
of that upon his brother. So there is necessity for communication,
the weak to the strong, and there is the necessity of sensitivity
on the part of the strong to the weak. If we must err, brethren,
let us err, and that's the proper way to pronounce it, let us err
in relinquishing more liberties than were necessary, than err
in indulging one more liberty than was safe. for the weakest
brother who's in our midst. Oh, if we must err, let's have
the excess of love. Let's have the excess of love
that relinquishes ten liberties where only six were needed to
be safe. Then to relinquish five and find that the sixth one indulged
was he. May God give us such a baptism
of love as will enable us so to walk to one another's edification. Let us pray. O God, our Father, we stand amazed
at the comprehensiveness of your word, how we thank you for all
of those circumstances rooted, many of them in heathen culture
and in decadent religion, some of them in the old economy of
Moses, which, when brought together in the life of the early church,
forced from the pen of the apostle these words of practical instruction,
O God, how can we ever thank you enough for that anticipation
of the needs of your people throughout all the history of their life
upon earth? And you have given to us this
sufficient and infallible rule of faith and of practice. O God,
seal to our hearts these portions of your word which we've studied
together tonight. And again we plead, help us,
O God, in this delicate, this sensitive area, to walk by the
rule of Scripture and by that rule alone. Burn, then, your
word into our hearts You have promised that in the new covenant
you would write your law upon our hearts as well as put your
spirit within us, causing us to keep your statutes. Write
these, your laws, upon our hearts and give us that measure of love
that will delight to run in the way of your commandments. Hear
us, O God, in this our prayer. May the benediction of this hour
rest upon us and abide with us. O God, as we go to our several
homes, some go back to the places of study, back into the shop
and the office, back into the humdrum and the mundane, O Lord
grant that in every sphere of our legitimate calling in life
we may glorify You, the God of our salvation, and so live as
to bring praise to our Savior and be instruments of edification
one to another. Forgive us, Lord, where any of
us have been careless in the exercise of our liberty, where
we have caused any brother to stumble by following our example
beyond the present light of his conscience. Forgive us, Lord,
when in our weakness we have tried to bend the whole church
to our scruples and have intruded upon the throne rights of King
Jesus. O God, what a wicked thing this
is! Forgive us. Some of us can remember
how we've sought to do this. Lord, cleanse us. Oh, cleanse
us, we pray, and grant that by the Word operating in our consciences,
through the mighty power of the Spirit, we may more and more
have scruples concerning those things which you forbid, and
blessed liberty concerning those things which are your gifts to
us in Christ. Hear us then in these our petitions
and receive the praises we offer. We ask these mercies through
our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.